employer cover photo
employer logo
employer logo

Verisk Maplecroft

Now known as Verisk

Is this your company?

Low Morale and Weak Management - Avoid! - Principal Analyst Verisk Maplecroft Employee Review

1.0
15 May 2016
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

HR processes and benefits have improved.

Cons

Established by an idiosyncratic former CEO who treated employees extremely badly, the acquisition of Maplecroft by Verisk in December 2014 and de facto merger with sister company Wood Mackenzie in 2015 were widely expected by employees to turn the company around. However, performance has flatlined, with the underlying root causes of the company’s malaise left completely unaddressed by the new management. While there have been a few marginal improvements around processes and benefits in the area of human resources, the core of the company remains as rotten as it ever was in the pre-Verisk era. The fundamental flaws in the company lie with a cadre of middle/senior managers – most previously in position before the acquisition – who facilitated a business culture that treated employees with total disdain, working them to the bone and regularly deceiving both them and clients on deadlines and deliverables. Instead of jettisoning the senior team after the acquisition, these people were rewarded with new jobs and pay rises, while much more competent and respected employees were permitted to leave the company. In addition to weak middle/senior managers, the company continues to suffer from an identity crisis. Cynically positioning the company as a ‘data analytics’ company to attract suitors in New York, the former CEO and her acolytes – many still with the company – deliberately downplayed the real strengths of the company in political risk, human rights and the environment. Instead, the emphasis was placed on indices and supply chain management despite an almost total absence of anyone with real expertise in quantitative research or logistics/supply chain management. Unfortunately, the errors of the previous era have been perpetuated by the new CEO based in New York, who makes very infrequent visits to the UK offices where the bulk of staff work. This has left her over-reliant on the same people who created the mess in the first place. Two employee surveys have revealed that employees are very unhappy – morale is extremely low and there is little light at the end of the tunnel.

Explore other reviews about Verisk Maplecroft

4.0
31 Jan 2020
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Excellent opportunities for junior analysts (e.g. college grads or former interns) to develop a skill-set or to work on projects that most other businesses in the space wouldn't offer. For example, the company generally promotes from within for product management roles and provides multiple opportunities for willing analysts to lead on projects or client engagement. - Global presence which allows analysts to occasionally transfer between offices or to work remotely. - Hands off management approach means that analysts are given an opportunity to take ownership on projects and deliverables. - Unlike many other businesses in the sector, the company really does offer individuals opportunities to develop/grow, as long as they are willing to pursue opportunities they may not have expertise in. - a company that truly promotes a flexible working culture and supports L&D. - the scope and breadth of topics/industries that analysts are exposed to during their time with company sets them up for success when looking for their next jobs; analysts have moved on to roles with multinationals, branches of the armed forces, global consulting firms, and NGOs.

Cons

- Turnaround times on projects are often quite quick, meaning that analysts will have to juggle multiple competing priorities. - Pay is not the highest, though benefits package is top notch.

3.0
24 Mar 2017
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Really committed, bright colleagues, very little ego among fellow analysts

Cons

Leadership was incredibly unprofessional, salaries were low

2
See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All